Last modified: 2014-07-04 02:49:11 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T52979, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 50979 - Increase wgQueryCacheLimit from 1000 to 2000 on en.wiki
Increase wgQueryCacheLimit from 1000 to 2000 on en.wiki
Status: NEW
Product: Wikimedia
Classification: Unclassified
Site requests (Other open bugs)
wmf-deployment
All All
: Normal enhancement (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
: performance
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2013-07-08 20:56 UTC by Ryan Kaldari
Modified: 2014-07-04 02:49 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Ryan Kaldari 2013-07-08 20:56:54 UTC
Per Bug 50832 (and the comments in InitialiseSettings.php), I would like to propose raising wgQueryCacheLimit from 1000 to 2000 on en.wiki. Currently, it is set to 1000 for en.wiki, 2000 for de.wiki, and 5000 for all other wikis.
Comment 1 Sam Reed (reedy) 2013-07-08 21:02:24 UTC
Guess Asher/Tim should probably weigh in on this
Comment 2 Yuvi Panda 2014-07-03 21:27:28 UTC
*poke* Adding springle as well.
Comment 3 Bawolff (Brian Wolff) 2014-07-03 22:00:30 UTC
All those queries are generally filesorts and quite expensive. I would be very surprised if the query cache limit had much of an affect on anything performance wise.
Comment 4 Ryan Kaldari 2014-07-03 22:26:19 UTC
@Bawolff: Does that mean you would be OK with increasing it to 2000 or are you suggestion some other course of action (like getting rid of the limits)?
Comment 5 Bawolff (Brian Wolff) 2014-07-03 23:54:38 UTC
I mean im ok with increasing. Some limit is probably needed, i just doubt 1000 vs 2000 would make any appreciable difference. I would go as far as to suggest 5000 to be reasonable. 

Since cached special pages are paged via offset, a super really high limit would eventually introduce performance problems on the viewing cached results stage. But that's wiki agnostic anyways. No limits would probably also result in inserting a hundred thousand rows which would also be bad.

(i should be 100% clear that this is just my personal opinion. I definitely *do not* have the authority to decree what is and is not acceptable performance wise for wikimedia. I also have not profiled different settings or otherwise tested)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links